Friday's letters: Disappointed

Published: Friday, November 29, 2013 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, November 28, 2013 at 4:08 p.m.

To the editor: Our country should be disappointed that John Kerry, our secretary of state, is so anxious to do something famous that he is willing to accept a treaty with Iran that he knows he can get rather than negotiating hard for a treaty that the world needs. The world’s sanctions have finally forced Iran to the negotiating table, and Kerry is letting them go without their firm commitment to dismantle their nuclear weapons program.

I believe Kerry is another Neville Chamberlain, declaring “Peace in our time!” only to be sadly disproved in the not too distant future.

Larry Mobley

Hendersonville

Education issues

To the editor: The Nov. 8 Times-News reported that the new Ready Accountability Assessment showed that fewer than half of students in third grade and above scored at grade level proficiency, statewide.

I recently read “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.” (Frederick Douglass) I guess I can understand how our state legislators are impervious to the plight of children not being educated so they become proficient in skills needed for them to succeed in the society in which they are being raised. But I can’t understand how the business-friendly legislators and governor can ignore the economics of cutting funding to public schools.

Studies consistently show that under-educated persons make up a disproportionate number of the ranks of the unemployed and incarcerated in our wealthy society.

A recent study by the Minnesota Federal Reserve Bank showed that for every dollar invested in early childhood education, eight dollars were saved in unemployment and incarceration costs later on.

Are our legislators just being “penny wise” and “pound foolish” or is there a hidden agenda, such as the privatization of our schools for the benefit of children of the privileged?

Roy Harris

Hendersonville

Check your history

To the editor: Letters on the state of our politics require this response:

(A) As a history teacher, it is depressing to note the public ignorance on our electoral history. Grab a book! In many ways the current “conflicts” are laughable in terms of language, civility, violence, etc. This is part of that annoying feature of baby boomers — the belief that nothing of significance happened before we were born!

(B) Control — our lack of knowledge is depressing. A look at the period from FDR to today yields the following facts, which cannot be disputed: Democrats controlled the presidency 57 percent of the time; Democrats controlled the Senate 63 percent of the time; Democrats controlled the House of Representatives 81 percent of the time. Notice what’s missing in this data? Republicans.

Now, not being a Republican, I don’t much care to promote them. Their political failures are self-inflicted.

However, I have a different take on our conflicts: The problem is not the tea party or so-called “radical” conservatives. No, the problem is Democrats. They are fine when they are in charge, but do not play well with others when they have to “share” or “compromise.” Note the recent move in the Senate!

Jim Griffin

Hendersonville

Filibuster rule

To the editor: Today the United States Senate under the control of Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and his fellow Democrats amended an important and long-standing rule of this branch of Congress by a vote of 52 to 48.

The requirement for ending a filibuster will now be a simple majority (51 votes) rather than the three-fifths (60 votes), which had been the rule. This change only applies to certain executive and judicial nominees. The change does not apply to Supreme Court nominees.

The previous filibuster rule had been viewed as one of the few options the minority party in the Senate possessed as a sort of balance in order to keep the majority party from running away with all executive nominees.

It will be interesting to see how Mr. Reid views this action in his rearview mirror 14 months from now if/when he becomes the minority leader of the Senate. He well might have the opportunity to enjoy a sip of water from the well he and his fellow party members poisoned. One can only hope.

<p>To the editor: Our country should be disappointed that John Kerry, our secretary of state, is so anxious to do something famous that he is willing to accept a treaty with Iran that he knows he can get rather than negotiating hard for a treaty that the world needs. The world’s sanctions have finally forced Iran to the negotiating table, and Kerry is letting them go without their firm commitment to dismantle their nuclear weapons program.</p><p>I believe Kerry is another Neville Chamberlain, declaring Peace in our time! only to be sadly disproved in the not too distant future.</p><p><em>Larry Mobley</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Education issues</h3>
<p>To the editor: The Nov. 8 Times-News reported that the new Ready Accountability Assessment showed that fewer than half of students in third grade and above scored at grade level proficiency, statewide.</p><p>I recently read It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. (Frederick Douglass) I guess I can understand how our state legislators are impervious to the plight of children not being educated so they become proficient in skills needed for them to succeed in the society in which they are being raised. But I can’t understand how the business-friendly legislators and governor can ignore the economics of cutting funding to public schools.</p><p>Studies consistently show that under-educated persons make up a disproportionate number of the ranks of the unemployed and incarcerated in our wealthy society.</p><p>A recent study by the Minnesota Federal Reserve Bank showed that for every dollar invested in early childhood education, eight dollars were saved in unemployment and incarceration costs later on.</p><p>Are our legislators just being penny wise and pound foolish or is there a hidden agenda, such as the privatization of our schools for the benefit of children of the privileged?</p><p><em>Roy Harris</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Check your history</h3>
<p>To the editor: Letters on the state of our politics require this response:</p><p>(A) As a history teacher, it is depressing to note the public ignorance on our electoral history. Grab a book! In many ways the current conflicts are laughable in terms of language, civility, violence, etc. This is part of that annoying feature of baby boomers  the belief that nothing of significance happened before we were born!</p><p>(B) Control  our lack of knowledge is depressing. A look at the period from FDR to today yields the following facts, which cannot be disputed: Democrats controlled the presidency 57 percent of the time; Democrats controlled the Senate 63 percent of the time; Democrats controlled the House of Representatives 81 percent of the time. Notice what’s missing in this data? Republicans.</p><p>Now, not being a Republican, I don’t much care to promote them. Their political failures are self-inflicted.</p><p>However, I have a different take on our conflicts: The problem is not the tea party or so-called radical conservatives. No, the problem is Democrats. They are fine when they are in charge, but do not play well with others when they have to share or compromise. Note the recent move in the Senate!</p><p><em>Jim Griffin</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Filibuster rule</h3>
<p>To the editor: Today the United States Senate under the control of Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and his fellow Democrats amended an important and long-standing rule of this branch of Congress by a vote of 52 to 48.</p><p>The requirement for ending a filibuster will now be a simple majority (51 votes) rather than the three-fifths (60 votes), which had been the rule. This change only applies to certain executive and judicial nominees. The change does not apply to Supreme Court nominees.</p><p>The previous filibuster rule had been viewed as one of the few options the minority party in the Senate possessed as a sort of balance in order to keep the majority party from running away with all executive nominees.</p><p>It will be interesting to see how Mr. Reid views this action in his rearview mirror 14 months from now if/when he becomes the minority leader of the Senate. He well might have the opportunity to enjoy a sip of water from the well he and his fellow party members poisoned. One can only hope.</p><p><em>John Knapp</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p>